TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why emojis are failing to evolve into a form of language

30 点作者 suhastech超过 8 年前

15 条评论

bane超过 8 年前
Emojis&#x2F;emoticons shouldn&#x27;t become a form of language, thats because they&#x27;re meant to be something else closer to punctuation. They&#x27;re really in-line annotation glyphs that add context, meaning and emotion to writing which enables clarity.<p>They can almost be thought of as parenthetical asides which are intended by the writer to aid the reader in understanding tone and emotion in a compact way.<p>For example, which form unambiguously conveys sarcasm the best?<p>&quot;Oh, it&#x27;s Sam, isn&#x27;t that great!&quot;<p>&quot;Oh, it&#x27;s Sam, isn&#x27;t that great! (jerk)&quot;<p>Now replace (jerk) with an appropriate glyph and we&#x27;re at emojis.<p>What written language sorely lacks is a standardized update to the punctuation system we use. We&#x27;re limited to single digit tone marks and a couple ways of modifying the text to try to convey a tremendous range of tones and emotions. We also need a system that does so without using cartoon characters. It&#x27;s very hard to convey serious emotional tones with variations of a yellow smiley face.<p>Western musical notation has an entire series of annotation marks to inform style on top of the basic &quot;sentence&quot; structure of the notes. It seems that writing also could use something similar.
评论 #13271026 未加载
评论 #13270871 未加载
评论 #13271328 未加载
torgoguys超过 8 年前
This isn&#x27;t the first time I&#x27;ve heard someone throw out the idea of emojis as a possible language. It seems popular in certain circles, including a couple of different podcasts I listen to.<p>Why do people insist on trying to shoehorn emojis into the realm of being a whole languange? <i>Let emojis be emojis.</i> They&#x27;re not a language. They&#x27;re not punctuation. They are how we use them.<p>I&#x27;m not a huge fan, but they can be fun and are quite good at conveying certain emotions and empathy. Plus other uses. Why must they be pushed towards use as something that they&#x27;re not?
评论 #13270745 未加载
评论 #13270817 未加载
rabboRubble超过 8 年前
If your base language is pictographic (ex. Chinese&#x2F;Japanese) then emoji blend into language. The only problem, not as easy to type &quot;emoji&quot; as it is to type Chinese or Japanese.<p>For a European language, not so much.
hobarrera超过 8 年前
The idea was never that emoji evolve into their own language, but rather compliment our exiting ones -- which they&#x27;re doing quite well IMHO.
评论 #13270854 未加载
nerdponx超过 8 年前
Aside from tongue-in-cheek projects like &quot;translating&quot; Moby Dick into emoji [1], did anyone really think they would become a standalone form of communication?<p>1: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;emojidick.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;emojidick.com&#x2F;</a>
评论 #13270598 未加载
评论 #13270612 未加载
qwertyuiop924超过 8 年前
Tom Scott talked about this when he and Matt Grey made Emojli, the Emoji-only messenger. You can find their talk about it at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=GsyhGHUEt-k" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=GsyhGHUEt-k</a><p>However, given that HN is startup central, note that if you are involved in startups and easily offended, you might want to give this video a miss.
amelius超过 8 年前
By the way, I&#x27;m still missing the &quot;face-palm&quot; emoji in Whatsapp. Also missing is an emoji for &quot;not impressed&quot;.
评论 #13270684 未加载
评论 #13270566 未加载
faitswulff超过 8 年前
This reminds me of my girlfriend&#x27;s tale of her Chinese friend who married an Middle Eastern man. They communicate primarily through emojis, as they&#x27;re not proficient enough with their shared language, English, to communicate.<p>I wouldn&#x27;t take this as a counterpoint to the headline, as they don&#x27;t seem to communicate very effectively.<p>XD
评论 #13270746 未加载
makecheck超过 8 年前
They are clearly used so they can’t be a failure.<p>Perhaps it won’t be long before we see emojis sprinkled throughout printed books (perhaps similar to TV shows popping up texting bubbles). If these icons have value as a way to express something in an interesting way, they probably belong in literature too.
nkkollaw超过 8 年前
I really don&#x27;t get this.<p>Why would emojis evolve into a form of language? It doesn&#x27;t make any sense whatsoever.
mettamage超过 8 年前
I didn&#x27;t read the article.<p>I came here to comment the fun tidbit that emoticons do follow Zipf&#x27;s law. I know this from emoticons, because I mined some data from Twitter and plotted the frequencies.<p>My guess is that it&#x27;s the same for emojis :)
mecredis超过 8 年前
From the post:<p><i>Since emojis often bear graphic resemblances to our real faces, the understanding has often been that there would be no problems in interpreting them, and that the sender and the recipient would agree on such interpretation.</i><p>As someone fairly immersed in the emoji community, this is a strawman argument (i.e., no one really tries to argue this).<p>People love and use emoji not in spite of their ambiguity but rather because of it.<p>Even Unicode encourages emoji to have multiple meanings:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;unicode.org&#x2F;emoji&#x2F;selection.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;unicode.org&#x2F;emoji&#x2F;selection.html</a><p><i>Does the candidate emoji have notable metaphorical references or symbolism?</i><p>And from their FAQ:<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unicode.org&#x2F;faq&#x2F;emoji_dingbats.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unicode.org&#x2F;faq&#x2F;emoji_dingbats.html</a><p><i>Do emoji characters have single semantics?<p>A: No. Because emoji characters are treated as pictographs, they are encoded in Unicode based primarily on their general appearance, not on an intended semantic.</i><p>Many people <i>want</i> to think there are some folks out there like myself who are seriously arguing Emoji are a language, but this isn&#x27;t really true. And I say that as the author of a book called &quot;How to Speak Emoji&quot;. The thing is, it&#x27;s a humor book designed to be sold in Urban Outfitters. It&#x27;s not a real language guide.<p>If you&#x27;re curious about more nuanced takes on how emoji are actually being used, here are some good resources:<p>Tyler Schnoebelen&#x27;s talk at Emojicon: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slideshare.net&#x2F;TylerSchnoebelen&#x2F;emoji-linguistics" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.slideshare.net&#x2F;TylerSchnoebelen&#x2F;emoji-linguistics</a><p>Gretchen McCulloch on how Emoji aren&#x27;t really threatening English: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;the-toast.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;29&#x2F;a-linguist-explains-emoji-and-what-language-death-actually-looks-like&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;the-toast.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;06&#x2F;29&#x2F;a-linguist-explains-emoji-an...</a><p>The tl;dr: journalists &#x2F; bloggers would love to get someone to argue that emoji are a language so they can &quot;Well, actually&quot; them, but the truth is this isn&#x27;t really happening much.<p>However, some of us are deeply curious about whether our usage of emoji are evolving language-like characteristics and grammars. See this recent research on whether emoji have their own syntax:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;makingnoiseandhearingthings.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;12&#x2F;07&#x2F;do-emojis-have-their-own-syntax&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;makingnoiseandhearingthings.com&#x2F;2016&#x2F;12&#x2F;07&#x2F;do-emojis...</a><p>Note that a distinct syntax is probably necessary but not sufficient for emoji to be considered a language.
circa超过 8 年前
Long live Wing Dings!
sigzero超过 8 年前
Because NOBODY wants emojis to be a form of language?
dvh超过 8 年前
Because there is no emoji for &quot;because&quot;